Each of the three cities in the region (map) can be controlled by different players or a single player can create multiple cities within a region. The actual cities themselves can barely be called cities considering the total land area. It also sounds like the plots each city can be built on are fixed and can't be terraformed which is another WTF design decision.

Add to that the fact that you cannot save in a single player game (huh??) and the fact that you need an internet connection and EA's servers to be up to play the game and that pretty much guarantees I won't buy this pile of crap. I was waiting to see if EA could return to form and release something better than the Cities XL games but they appear to have failed on all fronts.

Main critique is the size aspect.. with Sim City 4 you could build to your hearts delight and if you were a truly insane guy you could use the entire region to build a true metropolis.

Now you get barely more space than my suburb apparently and are "expected" to work with other towns in your region for that special experience.

These days it seems all games need to have a social component.. multiplayer for the heck of it. While that is ok for truly competitive games like sports or shooters where computer controlled opponents are nothing like a live opponent i challenge the wisdom to include these in traditionally single player games.

I have no problem if EA wanted this component.. some people will like this aspect but why making it the dominant aspect of the game? Why not include both variants of it?

I was so excited when the game was announced and first screens appeared but now it seems i'll pass on it come release day here to read some more indepth reviews after everybody gets their hands on it.

Sim City 4 with updated graphics and some tweaks here and there.. bough wíthout having read a single review. This one? Not so much.

The smaller city doesn't inherently bother me. I see advantages and disadvantages.

Click to expand...

I thought the same thing until I saw the Giant Bomb video and an image that someone mocked up in the Ars comments (see page 9). We're not talking something half the size of cities in the previous SimCity games which I'd be okay with--we're talking a MUCH smaller fraction. I tend to play like FPAlpha and build huge, sprawling metropolises rather than constantly starting new cities. That simply doesn't seem to be possible in this game.

To me, the "always on" DRM sucks but I could learn to live with it but the small city plots are a deal-breaker.

To me, the always-on DRM was the deal-breaker, the small city sizes just make it easier for me not to buy it.

I can understand the decision to enforce small cities because it would be too intensive on the CPU to run the glassbox simulation on a larger scale, but what in god's name possessed them to spread out all the cities in a region the way they have? Once you've built up your city to a high density what you see is rectangular clusters of high-rise buildings surrounded by hectares of wilderness, which looks ridiculous. The cities in Sim City 4 butted up next to each other, so when you ran out of room to expand (which took a long time) you could move on to the neighbouring city and at least continue the illusion of them being one big city. The way they've done it in this new Sim City just looks asinine.

The smaller city doesn't inherently bother me. I see advantages and disadvantages.

Click to expand...

I thought the same thing until I saw the Giant Bomb video and an image that someone mocked up in the Ars comments (see page 9). We're not talking something half the size of cities in the previous SimCity games which I'd be okay with--we're talking a MUCH smaller fraction. I tend to play like FPAlpha and build huge, sprawling metropolises rather than constantly starting new cities. That simply doesn't seem to be possible in this game.

Click to expand...

Oh wow, I just looked at the video. That is, in fact, pathetic. If it were twice that size, it would be small but still inspiring of a nice city. I agree half the size of Sim City 2000 would probably be a reasonable compromise. That's like my neighborhood. I probably routinely travel larger distances that are possible in that game.

ETA: Does anyone know if there's a demo. I'm willing to at least give it a fair shake at no cost to me.

I'm not sure why everyone was expecting SimCity 4 but in 3D. That was never going to happen, considering SimCity 4 sold below expectations and the brand hasn't been touched in several years.

I'm actually really enjoying it; the small city size makes the game more difficult, and the social element for playing with friends in sandbox mode is really fun. Really, the worst part about the whole affair is Origin's servers being a steaming pile of shit.

That was never going to happen, considering SimCity 4 sold below expectations and the brand hasn't been touched in several years.

Click to expand...

I didn't realize SC4 sold under expectations. If EA wanted to change to formula around and try to modernize SimCity, that's fine. But calling it SimCity, shoehorning in multiplayer and taking out something many considered the best part of the game (the ability to build massive cities) is begging for disappointment from those who wanted a game like the originals, only modernized.

I wasn't expecting that, but it's what I would have liked. Include curved roads and the better zoning system, the upgradable civic buildings, the worker class system, as well as general improvements in the simulation, and I would have been very temped to break my boycott over the DRM. But it has been clear from following its development that they've tried to take this game in a different direction, and that direction doesn't interest me.

I wouldn't be surprised if EA decided that if you want a bigger plot of land, that you'd have to buy it via microtransaction.

Click to expand...

Considering that's the way they are going with several other games, I wouldn't doubt it. "Want a larger city? 4.99 please. Subways? Also 4.99." Etc, etc.

The game looks really nice, and I like some of the city management ideas they went with, but I won't be picking it up. The forced multiplayer and online aspects and inevitable microtransactions does it for me.

If EA wanted to change to formula around and try to modernize SimCity, that's fine. But calling it SimCity, shoehorning in multiplayer and taking out something many considered the best part of the game (the ability to build massive cities) is begging for disappointment from those who wanted a game like the originals, only modernized.

Click to expand...

The thing is, though, that market probably doesn't exist anymore, at least not in a large enough fashion for EA, which is in the business of making money, to green-light such an endeavor. The other thing is ... it is SimCity. Original team members have worked on it. Will Wright was impressed by it. It's honestly more of a sequel to the 1989 SimCity than to SimCity 4, but it's still SimCity. Play in Sandbox mode, set up a bunch of different cities within the same region, and boom, you're selling your excess energy and you're attracting tourists and managing your budgets and reticulating splines.

The only way it isn't SimCity is if people had predefined notions of what it was going to be, like "It's not my Star Trek" complaints about J.J. Abrams.

I was invited for an open beta test, but I couldn't even figure out how to download the demo and play it so fuck it.

As soon as i heard that you have to be online (WTF?!?!) I gave up on the game. Maybe in a few years they will get Wil Wright back and Make a true and proper SimCity 5.

I'll take my SC2000 and 3000 anyway to the over useless additions of 4 and this dumb new one without a number.

Click to expand...

Four is the best Sim City Game in the franchise, it still looks good by even today's standards and with Rush Hour and NAM building large, interconnected, cities in a region is incredibly satisfying and fun.

I'd already had my reservations on this game, the smaller lot sizes, the "always on" connection. Now this just bites it.

Click to expand...

I'm trying to think of an online-based game that didn't have day-one server problems from the rush of downloads and activations ... and I'm having a hard time thinking of one, especially from the Origin platform. I'd have thought that EA would have learned its lesson from the Battlefield 3 debacle, but I imagine that SimCity will settle down in a day or two.

It's not a perfect game (if anything, I think it's over-designed and overly ambitious), but I'm loving the hell out of it ... when the Origin servers decide they actually want to work (it sounds like EA / Maxis didn't do a good job of projecting how GlassBox's resources needs would scale upon wide release). The multiplayer component is great.

bigdaddy said:

As soon as i heard that you have to be online (WTF?!?!) I gave up on the game. Maybe in a few years they will get Wil Wright back and Make a true and proper SimCity 5.

Click to expand...

Will Wright seems content to be out of the games business, for now ... he certainly made enough money from it. In any event, Maxis brought him in during the beta phase, and he said that he was impressed and approved of the product.

Add to that the fact that you cannot save in a single player game (huh??) and the fact that you need an internet connection and EA's servers to be up to play the game and that pretty much guarantees I won't buy this pile of crap. I was waiting to see if EA could return to form and release something better than the Cities XL games but they appear to have failed on all fronts.

Fuck you EA for taking a steaming dump all yet over another game.

Click to expand...

Unreal. I can never understand why subsequent new iterations of games actually remove previously enjoyed options and add annoyances.
Fuck this forced internet connection shit. Are game developers really thinking consumers will take it up the ass like this? I thought after the Diablo III backlash they might have learned.

Sorry to hear the newest version of this classic is so lame. I remember playing VGA graphics SimCity on a Tandy 1000 in the 1990s. It was rock solid and we didn't have to connect to shit [56k modem dials up]. I never tried any SimCity games beyond SimCity 2000. Did they really improve? I remember seeing the "future" graphics pack add-on for the original and it blew my mind.